Is C+ still worth buying?

[Fab Foodie]

Well said. They are a commercial magazine that needs readers to survive. To say they are not responsive to readers' opinions is ludicrous - they may not be responsive to your views, but that is different. How typical are you?

The reality is that riding 'sportives' has been the growth area of road riding over the last 8 to 10 years. The magazine reflects this. Similarly, fifteen hundred quid bikes are not some mythical 'unattainable' super bike', but the pretty normal ride for shed loads of 'recreational riders' or even decked out tourers. Their core market probably also dreams of 'one day' owning something even more exotic or adding a bit of 'bling' to their present bike. Or at least enjoy reading about these things.

However I do think C+ tries to be all things to all men, and I'm certain they know a) the demographic of their core readership, and what they like to read about. That's why they're still in business.

If you don't sit comfortably in their target readership, then try another magazine or start your own if you're convinced they're are millions of other like you. But I bet after a couple of years of filling a monthly magazine you too will find yourself re visiting the same subject matters. That's why there is a definite 'life cycle' to any magazine readership.

I'd go with that assessment too. C+ suits me, I'm not big on keeping-up with road racing results but am interested in shall we say faster recreational riding primarily followed by long distance and a bit of commuting thrown in. If I look back over the last 12 months there has been a reasonable spread from £400 basic bikes to £5000 dreams, but the main area of focus is probably £500 to £1500 bikes and kit which is where many of us sit. All in all I think it's a pretty good read and covers pretty much all of my needs.

 

[yello]

I wouldn't mind getting it again but it's ludicrously priced to subscribe from France. I'd rather improve my French by trying to read 'Le Cycle'... which is roughly the same thing.

I quite liked C+. It has a formula, so does tend to repeat itself, and I stopped reading it cover to cover years ago, but it's the kind of mag I liked to have, for reference etc, even though it invariably took me only a few hours max to flip, read what interested me, and file away.

 

[asterix]

No, I prefer getting info off the web.

 

[Mortiroloboy]

I have issues (geddit?) with C+ and I've written to them and posted in BR Office but they tend to reply with a snotty defensive response of self-justification.
However in their defence it is difficult to write something new and fresh for every copy and after a couple of years subscription I think I've read every review, tech guide etc that I want to. I'm also clever enough to plan a ride of my own making from a map if I go to another part of the country.

A couple of years ago there was a review of a ride in Derbyshire, a few pics accompanied the article, one of which showed a cyclist climbing a hill , behind the driver by some distance was a car, behind the car was a police traffic car, the driver of the police car was carrying out a perfectly safe overtake of the car behind the cyclist.

The caption under the picture said 'interesting overtake' clearly the editor or whomever was responsible for the caption accompanying the photograph felt that the overtake was wrong.

From my perspective and the picture I could see, the overtake appeared to be perfectly safe, there was a straight stretch of road ahead of the cyclist, which the highly trained driver of the police car would have been able to see, we are trained to look into the distance, as far as can be seen in fact and also through the glass of the car in front.

Given the view afforded by the wide angled picture it was evident that there were no other mechanically propelled vehicles in the shot, besides the police car and the member of the publics car. The cyclist was probably travelling at a maximum of 15-20 mph, possibly a lot less, certainly not fast enough to present a hazard to a car which could accelerate and travel at twice that speed, with a clear view of the road ahead, affording sufficient distance to perform a safe overtake of both the preceeding car and the cyclist, allowing the driver of the police car to return to the nearside of the carriageway and proceed safely on the rest of his journey .

I wrote to the editor and took issue with the caption, they didn't print my letter or respond to it, probably as it was critical of their stance, I do feel that there was/is a certain anti motorist element at work within the editorial team at C+, Which as both a cyclist and motorist (how many of us aren't?) I found difficult to understand.

The magazine is well put together generally, but like others have mentioned it does seem to have lost its general appeal and become very narrow in its target readership, who would appear to now be high income earning sportive riders.

 

[Arch]

Could we have a photo of the cover, just to see the bike/bent/trike or other transportation mode of course.

Who knows, perhaps your cover shot will launch a subscription frenzy

I doubt it, but:

http://www.velovision.co.uk/cgi-bin/show_comments.pl?storynum=843

I'm NOT the blurry bloke in the background overtaking....

 

[Fab Foodie]

No, I prefer getting info off the web.

I know what you mean, but the web's not easily available whilst I'm on the crapper...but C+ is!
(The CTC mag hangs on the back of the outside khazi door...)

 

[Danny]

The CTC mag hangs on the back of the outside khazi door...

Don't tell Simon 1.5

 

[Mortiroloboy]

I know what you mean, but the web's not easily available whilst I'm on the crapper...but C+ is!
(The CTC mag hangs on the back of the outside khazi door...)

Surely the paper is too shiny?!

 

[red_tom]

My first thought when I read this thread was 'ooooh, the mods aren't going to like this.'

 

[The Young Soul Rebel]

No - it is a lot of money and it only takes an hour to read, at most

 

[Chuffy]

I still have a lingering fondness for C+, but it does get very samey after a while. The writing isn't all that good either, decent blokes like Simon Withers rarely appear now.

The CTC mag comes free with the insurance but I'd happily live without it.

 

[NickM]

...khazi...

Are you sure, FF? I thought it was spelt "karzy" (but I stand to be corrected)

 

[Chuffy]

Are you sure, FF? I thought it was spelt "karzy" (but I stand to be corrected)

It's 'khazi' in Spike Milligan's war memoirs.

 

[tdr1nka]

That of course being 'Spike Milligna' the world famous typographic error!

Hoithankyoooo!

 

[craigwend]

Been reading it for over ten years (or feels like it) even subscribe nowadays.

I still enjoy it; it comes out regularly enough for me.

I ideally would like a Porsche 911 but will never afford one, but read reviews etc...

My wife still does not understand why I need to read more reviews of bikes and bits when I've got lots already.

I don't particularly like the new format, just because I don't like change.

Horses for velos?